New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1887-05-26
NO SUNDAY DRINK IN SIGHT.
THE BILL AGAIN LOST IN THE SENATE.

| REASONS FOR DEFEATING IT-oNE MORE ATTEMPT
WILL BE MADE TO PASS 1T.
| ALBANY, May 25.-Mayor Hewitt's enforcement OF
the excise law Sundays In New-York has alarmed
the Democratic leaders, and they are working hard to
get the Republican Legislature to pull their chestnuta
out of the fire. The majority OF the Republicans do
not believe in burning their fingers in this matter and
while of them favor modification of the present
law they with few exceptions opposed to opening
all the liquor shops Sunday proposed By the
Democrats The matter discussed at some length
in the Senate to-day, when Mr.. McMillan's Sunday
opening bill up This was brought here by
Excise Commissioner Woodman, and he and I" Ed
Stokes and other wellknown Democrats were very
active the floor OF the Senate In trying to secure
votes tor the bill. Mr.. Murphy took charge Of it and
the Democrats apparently regarded it as their
measure. 1t was the first measure that came up to-
day in the Senate.
Mr.. Kellogg at took the floor against 1t and 10
q strong speech he pointed out the effect of the BILL
1t would. he said, practically wipe out all the barriers
erected by legislation tor halt century in favor Of
proper observance of the Sabbath day. The bill
allows hotel keepers sell Sunday by the bottle,
under storekeeper's license, which they are not
allowed to do during the week. 1t would also allow
every gin mill in the State by the mere device OF
furnishing crackers and cheese table, to sell
liquor all day Sunday. He warned the Republicans
that II they fell into this Democratic trap they would
dc their party and the State ncaculable injury He
for one wou d never vote for such measure.
Mr.. Murphy said that he would meet this objection
By amending the bill to apply only to cities OF
over 600, 900 inhabitants.
Mr.. Mcmillan accepted amendment TO make 1t
apply only to cities OF over 10000 inhabitants.
Mr.. Fassett sad there doubt that the bill as
before the Senate would open Sunday every liquor
shop in the cities that within the provisions OF
the bill The existing Sunday law had been on the
statute books since 1887. The Democrats had often
been IN power since and had resisted all attempts to
repeal the law. Now the Mayor of New-YOrk was
making what probably spasmodic effort to
enforce the law, and the Democrats wanted the Re-
publicaus practically to repeal it, 1t any bill were
passed at all 1t should be only such would enable
hotels TO furnish their guests on Sunday with light
wines and beer at the dining table In connection
with board.
| Mr. smith said the bill was bad one. 1t permitted
the sale of liquor at table by any one holding an
excise license. What tablet Any table In bar
room where crackers and cheese served. He
raised the point OF order tha5 under the rules the
third reading OF this bill which had only just been
introduced ard never printed was out OF order
Lieutenant Governor Jones, who exhibited q de-
cided partiality for the bill, overruled this and all
other points OF order calculated TO impede the bill.
lie provoked criticism by saying that 1t was too late
| in the session TO try to o0struct legislation. 49,
| The bill was then temporarily laid aside, and Mr..
Vedder called up the Assembly bill to prohibit the
sale of hquor In quantities of five gallons and over in
towns in which, under the local option clause, it sale
in smaller quantities was prohibited. Messrs. Mur-
ply and Plunktt promptly objected to the consdera-
Mr. Fagau tried to have Queens and Suffolk Counties
excepted, but in this he failed and the bill passed
The Sunday liquor bill was again taken up. Further
points ut order were promptly oyerruled by the pre-
siding officer. Mr. Fas.ett called attention to the
eagerness ol the Democrats TO get through this BILL
He moved to amend as to strike out the word
"excss license and insert hotel y license.
Mr.. Murphy said that there was no such thing as a
hotel license. The motion was lost Mr. Pitts and
others voting against it, on the ground that there was
such q thing as hotel license. Mr. tassett
after Sard learned from Excise Commissioner Wood
man that there such thing as a hotel license,
both OF the first and second class aud he called atten
ito to the fact that his amendment was defeated by
false pretences This action the pant of Mr.
Murphy and Mr. Mcmillan defeated the bill. II then
came up for Its third reading and various members
explained their votes. Mr.. Coggeshall said that he
that Judge Davis and the Rev. Dr. Crosby had ap-
proved it He thought tins WAS endorsement"
enough Tor him.
enforced In New York il had increased the receipts of
the Long Island City liquor dealers by $4,000 q
Sunday. But he added. 1t had resulted in riots and
bloodshed and great disorder in Queens County en-
Sunday, and he wanted the bill passed 80 that tue
New-York people could get drunk at home Sunday.
Mr. Fassett took up Mr.. Fagan's argument as tho
best one that had been offered against legazing the
to pass a bill so that the Germans could drink beer
Sundays. Now II was proposed by this bill to let
the Germans 90 and to limit the bill to three cities
and there allow the general sale OF liquor =,
Mr. Worth argued In favor OF the BILL He thonght
that the country members had right to egslate on
such matters Tor New-York and Brooklyn. On the
final vote the result was follows. Democrats in
italics:
YEAs-Coggeshall cullen DAILY, Dunhan. Fagan Mcmillan
Murphy Parker Pierce, PIu"ket Reilly 1rdphd0en Wem-
SAYs-Barager comstock. Connolly. Fassett Griswold
nsscs Sloan sn vsdSs SSGs HSsP
Mr.. Murphy moved to reconsider the vote, and that
motion las on the table. Under this motion another
effort will be made to pass the bill.